From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Coleman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 18, 1990
157 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

January 18, 1990

Appeal from the County Court of Albany County (Harris, J.).


On April 6, 1988, defendant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to a reduced count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree in full satisfaction of an indictment which charged that crime in its third degree and other lesser drug-related offenses. The plea arose out of defendant's sale of cocaine to an undercover informant at defendant's home on July 14, 1986. Pursuant to the plea bargain, defendant was sentenced to six months' incarceration and five years' probation.

On this appeal, defendant complains of the ineffective assistance of his attorney due to the attorney's failure to make certain pretrial motions. We find this contention meritless in view of the attorney's experience, the overwhelming proof of defendant's guilt and the favorable plea bargain that defendant made (People v. Ellsworth, 131 A.D.2d 109, 111; People v. Bonk, 83 A.D.2d 695). As to defendant's claim of his attorney's failure to make pretrial motions, there was no basis for a Wade hearing, and a hearing pursuant to People v. Darden ( 34 N.Y.2d 177) was held after which County Court issued a written decision finding that the informant verified the information attributed to him in the search warrant, that the source of the informant's information was from his own personal observations and from conversations with defendant, and it was found that the informant had given reliable information in the past. We agree with the determination of County Court that the test of People v. Darden (supra) was satisfied.

We likewise find meritless defendant's claim in regard to the excessiveness of his sentence. Considering defendant's conviction of a class D felony and the seriousness of that charge, as well as defendant's favorable plea bargain, the sentence was warranted (see, People v. McAllister, 58 A.D.2d 712).

Finally, although nine months elapsed between defendant's conviction and his sentencing, we do not find the delay unreasonable (see, Matter of Braunstein v. Frawley, 64 A.D.2d 772, 773). Defendant's judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Kane, Casey, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Coleman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 18, 1990
157 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Coleman

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ARTHUR L. COLEMAN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jan 18, 1990

Citations

157 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
550 N.Y.S.2d 191

Citing Cases

People v. Santana

However, when the People are “actually aware” (People v. James, 78 AD3d 862, 863 [2010];People v. McNeil, 237…

People v. Mackey

Although defendant goes to great lengths in maintaining that his original attorney in the pre-plea proceeding…